Comments by "Glamdolly" (@glamdolly30) on "Derek Van Schaik"
channel.
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@juanitarichards1074 I think you're right, the fact all the windows were shut at the house casts serious doubt on his story about Shanann. I think he's snide and got a kick out of saying she stank like a skunk - if you recall he also embellished and claimed the children had noticed a bad smell from their mother's body in the back of the truck. He's despicable.
Thanks - it's yet more evidence, were it needed, that Chris Watts is a totally self serving, immoral slimeball, to whom lies come much more readily than the truth.
When you are honest and decent by inclination, it's very, very difficult to get your head round a killer as warped as Chris Watts - and his creepy family too, come to that.
This is why I regularly encounter people who've swallowed his garbage about taking the children to Cervi 319 alive, unquestioningly. It's not their fault - they aren't psychopaths, so struggle to compute that these freaks exist and appear as unremarkable and ordinary as Chris Watts! If only they had horns and a tail, then poor Shanann and everyone else who's fallen victim to one would have a chance to escape them unscathed.
6
-
6
-
@looking4things669 Agreed, Sheriff Grady Judd actually represents Polk County, Florida, but was appalled at his colleagues' bungling of the Brian Laundrie case, as revealed on that damning bodycam footage. When reporters asked for his opinion, true to form he didn't hold back and let them have it! Good for him - he is too principled to cover for colleagues when they mess-up with such tragic consequences for a young woman.
Sheriff Judd is a fine, upstanding law enforcement officer, with enough experience and wisdom to recognise the MO of a manipulative abuser like Brian Laundrie in nanoseconds. As he made clear, he would not be taken in by Laundrie's 'nice guy act', as his dumb colleagues were. You would not have seen that guy fist-bumping the creep!
Sheriff Grady said he would have arrested Brian Laundrie on the roadside and taken him into custody on suspicion of domestic abuse - after two independent 911 witness reports of him hitting Gabby, there were ample grounds to do just that. People do not dial 911 for no damn reason - and they certainly would not have called police to report a slight blonde woman slapping a man, as Laundrie's supporters are ludicrously claiming!
I believe this case could have ended very differently, if police had not missed a golden opportunity to confront a cowardly woman abusing loser with his totally unacceptable crimes against Gabby Petito. Had Brian Laundrie been taken into custody in handcuffs, as he should have been, Gabby would have had to tell her parents how his abuse was escalating on the road trip. I think that would likely have meant third party involvement (ie her family staging an intervention to get her home), the end of the van life project - and Gabby's ultimate survival.
If police were properly trained in the realities of domestic abuse they would know victims defend their abuser - that's to be expected. And that's why, when the victim won't confront the abuser (for all kinds of reasons that seem valid to them at the time), law enforcement MUST do just that. Far too many women are dying horrific premature deaths at the hands of abusers like Brian Laundrie.
Incidentally, Sheriff Judd went even further in criticising his fellow police officers. He said had he been in charge of this case, there's no way Brian Laundrie would have had the opportunity to leave his parents' house and go on the run, after Gabby Petito was reported missing! He argued as soon as Laundrie returned home in Gabby's van without her, police should have taken him into custody. Most people would agree 100%.
Once Laundrie is dragged from his auntie's spare room by the scruff of his scrawny neck (or wherever the loser is hiding), the Keystone Cops have some serious questions to answer about their bungling of this entire case!
6
-
6
-
5
-
@carolarico3451 Yes, it's sadly all too obvious the victim-blamers are commenting from a position of breathtaking ignorance, of both domestic abuse and the law!
One poster's suggestion that independent 911 witness reports can't be trusted, and could be somehow suspect or biased against the man (in this case there were two totally independent reports made to police of Brian assaulting Gabby), shows exactly how clueless some of these comments are! I mean SO ridiculously stupid, they don't warrant serious consideration.
Police pulled the van over because of those recent 911 reports of Brian's violence to his girlfriend. They did not meet the couple 'cold', with no clue that they were dealing with an allegedly abusive male. Far from it, thanks to those 911 calls, they'd been fully briefed about the likely dynamic between the pair, from two witnesses with no axe to grind. Yet at no point did the officers confront Brian about the recent, serious assault allegations against him, least of all question or challenge him about them. Why not?
The police officers have absolutely no excuse for deciding that Gabby, not Brian, was the problem partner. As professionals they should know that domestic abuse victims are overwhelmingly female, and perpetrators overwhelmingly male. Victims of domestic homicide are almost exclusively female. While it's well documented men can also be abuse victims, the abuse of males is not likely to be life-threatening, as it is for females. Oranges and apples! Therefore it was Gabby the female, not Brian the male, who was at risk of serious harm from what was quite obviously an abusive relationship. But the police totally failed to recognise this fact, prioritise Gabby as the vulnerable party, and act accordingly to support her.
There's no question cops called the relationship wrong, and as a result handled it wrong. Two weeks after the footage, the woman is dead from homicide, and the man is on the run from police. That's powerful evidence of just how badly law enforcement got it wrong!
Cops made a bad situation worse, by misidentifying the victim as the perpetrator. The latest bodycam video released from the camera/viewpoint of a different officer, shows police discussing the case together after the couple have left. Shockingly, the policeman who took the lead throughout the traffic stop, told his colleagues he '...could have put Gabby in jail', but decided not to because they were clearly 'a young couple in love'. His wildly inaccurate conclusions would be laughable, if their implications weren't so serious and ultimately tragic for Gabby. Whatever spin people try to put on the police bodycam footage, that is lousy detective work!
The officers actions only further isolated and compromised Gabby, making her more not less vulnerable to reconciling with her abuser Brian the next morning - totally on his terms. And after police had pretty much endorsed Brian's abuse of her, and he'd been repeatedly told by police: "Don't worry, you aren't in any trouble", he no doubt felt even more empowered and entitled to escalate his abuse. Her death soon afterwards, indicates he escalated it to murder.
In due course, Gabby Petito's homicide warrants a proper independent public enquiry into police mishandling of the case. Another very troubling aspect prompting widespread criticism and questions, is that Brian Laundrie was able to leave his parents' house and go underground, while his girlfriend was missing.
There also clearly needs to be an urgent, nationwide review and shake up of law enforcement's training on domestic abuse. Do police even get specialist training, in this critically important area of policing? If they do, it is inadequate in the extreme, requiring a radical overhaul.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@ljb8157 Your multiple, victim-blaming posts are utterly ludicrous, and say more about you than anyone involved in this horrific domestic murder. Gabby Petito lies dead on a slab, her death declared a homicide, and Brian Laundrie is on the run from police. How much more evidence do dumb misogynists like you need that she was the victim, and he was the perpetrator?
The scratches seen on Brian's face in the police bodycam are typically observed on men who have recently murdered women. They indicate Gabby had recently defended herself against a violent assault by him, and that scenario is confirmed by the independent witness who called 911 that morning to report him 'slapping and hitting' her on the street. His scratches are a chilling foreshadowing of her murder two weeks later.
Brian's facial markings are an indication of his violence and abuse, and to suggest Gabby should be blamed for defending herself against her soon-to-be killer (or even arrested, as some cretin stated), is some warped and weird misogyny.
You talk about 'the whole story', as if there's another side to this - it's clear you are seeking to justify Brian Laundrie's actions in abusing and finally killing his girlfriend. I've got news for you - there is none. No man has the right to put his hands on a woman, least of all kill her. Your posts represent the tragic Incels who are drawn to this case, because they regard nerdy, inadequate Brian Laundrie as some kind of hero. I'm beyond bored of your trolling. Is 'Hunt' your name, or just rhyming slang?! You are dismissed, Hunt.
5
-
5
-
@Mo-pm2oi Excellent post! The tragic homicide of Gabby Petito, and the escalating domestic abuse leading up to it captured on police bodycam, shows there is a widespread reluctance on the part of men to confront other men over their abuse. Police were totally ineffectual in their interactions with a man recently reported in two 911 calls, for violence to a woman. Why? This has to change!
Above all this tragic case shows far better training in domestic abuse is needed for law enforcement officers across the US. I believe with proper training and education in the typical MO of abusers (and the predictable reactions of their victims), those cops would have handled Brian Laundrie and Gabby Petito VERY differently.
That cowardly punk Laundrie needed to be confronted over his offending - and as Sheriff Grady Judd pointed out, after TWO independent 911 reports of him hitting Gabby, there was ample reason to arrest him at the roadside and take him into custody for domestic abuse. Instead those police did an old pals act with him, telling him he 'wasn't in any trouble (why the hell not?), fist bumping him, and driving him to a cosy hotel for the night. Why didn't they suck his dick while they were about it?!
In befriending Brian, those dumb police in effect endorsed his abuse of Gabby, making him feel empowered and entitled to not only continue his abuse when they were reunited next morning, but to escalate it to her murder two weeks later.
Had police treated Brian Laundrie like the law breaking domestic abuser he is and taken him into custody, Gabby would have had to tell her parents about his escalating abuse. That would likely have triggered a third party intervention by her family (decent people who love her very much and were unaware of Brian's abuse), the end of the van life project - and Gabby's safe return home. Police could have saved her life that day, had they only handled this in the right way and not been so damn concerned to let a male abuser off the hook.
Decent men like Sheriff Judd and Derek Van Shaik can call out the abuse of scumbags like Brian Laundrie - but a worrying percentage of males will not, and fall over themselves in these comments to make excuses for a scumbag who strangled a 22-year-old woman to death. That is every bit as troubling as the murder itself!
5
-
5
-
5
-
This was a superb, fresh and insightful analysis of this well-trod crime Derek - Bravo! As a British journalist who has studied this case inside out, it takes a lot to impress me!
I trust you'll be applying the same, razor sharp powers of deduction (and bullshit detection) on Chris Watts' supposed 'confession' regarding the children. I don't believe for a nanosecond he took Bella and Cece from the house alive. He had no earthly reason to delay the children's murders, least of all to kill them at a far riskier, outdoor works location.
Chris Watts' latest tale to visiting detectives in February 2019 was inspired by the so-called 'shadows theory' pushed by clickbait YouTubers, which his family tipped him off about. The Watts family monitor social media true crime gossip and update CW on the latest theories about him. He liked the 'shadows theory', the far-fetched idea that a live child's shadow can be seen on the driveway footage, and decided to endorse it a full six months after his murder convictions. He was bored in his cell and wanted attention and headlines. He even went one better that the clickbait YouTubers, claiming he took not one but BOTH children to Cervi 319 alive. As if! The clickbait gossips couldn't find a second 'child's shadow' or any evidence to support his claim.
In all probability Chris Watts killed the children first, and confirming the 'shadows theory' was a way for him to distract people from this ugly truth. There were many indications Bella and Cece were suffocated to death in their beds, not least the fact cadaver dogs alerted to this in both rooms. In his 111 minute, late night phone chat with his mistress, he mentioned laundering the girls' bedsheets which, he told her, "Stank". Why would he be laundering their bedding so late and why would it smell bad - did Bella (who suffered a violent struggle and didn't wear a nappy), defecate as her father killed her?
Shanann told a friend CW sounded 'annoyed' when she called that evening to tell him about her 3 hour flight delay. He likely WAS annoyed because he had already killed the children, so couldn't postpone the murders to another night when he had more time. As you identified in this video, he was in a hurry to get the crime done and dump the bodies at Cervi before sun up, so that was his sole focus.
There simply wasn't time for all the claims he made about having sex with his wife, sleeping, fighting with her, 'killing' the children twice (because an early attempt to suffocate them supposedly failed), etc, etc. I believe Sunday night/Monday morning was only about carrying out his long-plotted family murder, and arriving at work unruffled and smiling, like nothing happened. He was a man on a mission - that why he wouldn't have let two traumatised little girls run riot outside his house and wake neighbours, as he was loading their pregnant mother's corpse into his truck. The driveway video shows him loading dead, not live victims into his truck.
Thanks for pointing out the cruel, arrogant nonsense of his claim Shanann did not fight for her or her babies' lives as he strangled her. As her father Frank pointed out, she adored her children and would have fought Chris Watts "like a tiger" had she known his murderous intentions towards them. It's obvious there isn't a mark on him because he pinned down her arms with his strong legs - Shanann had long nails but clearly didn't have a chance to use them!
I'm convinced like most cowardly family annihilators, he killed all three victims inside the house behind 4 walls, where they couldn't summon help and he wouldn't be witnessed and unmasked as a killer. The February 2019 audio is littered with clues he's inventing the story about taking the children to Cervi 319 alive, and killing them there.
He tells several specific tall tales and embellishments designed to distract from or explain away the evidence of what really happened. For example he says both girls were quiet and slept on the journey to Cervi 319 - but is that likely? He told cops whenever he fetched them from kindergarten they would cry for their mom all the way home. Chris Watts knew that route to Cervi very well and that it featured many road cameras positioned at the various traffic lights - if both girls were dead, saying they were asleep would explain why they could not be seen on any images taken en route.
Then there's his dumb story about covering Shanann's face and feet with two black plastic refuse sacks in the back of the truck, so Bella and Cece wouldn't be upset at seeing their dead mother. He was about to kill them both - why would he care about their feelings? That story was an obvious ruse to explain away the two black refuse sacks police recovered floating around the Cervi oil fields after the murders, which had contained the girls' corpses and were a smoking gun they had left the house dead, not alive.
I'm curious to find out how many red flags YOU identified that he's making up this version of the children's murders as he goes along!
He stammers and gets muddled when he lies - he also gets snappy with detectives and is evasive when they try to press him on details that don't make sense or require further clarification. He says he both strangled and smothered the children. He recycles elements of his first, partial confession, when he stole Agent Tammy Lee's story that Shanann had killed the children. Back then he told cops his wife had strangled both girls and that in a rage: "I did to Shanann what she just did to the girls". This almost exact same sentence comes up again when he describes murdering Cece in front of Bella. He claims Bella asked him: "Are you going to do to me what you just did to Cece?" Sound familiar? That's not even a phrase that would come from the lips of a 4 year old!
CW also states he will never forget Bella's last words to him, which he tells us were: "Daddy - No!" Then a few moments later he quotes her last words as "No - Daddy!" So which was it, Chris? You said you'd never forget, but it seems you already did!
In practical terms it would be very hard to get sufficient traction to suffocate two tiny, wriggly 3 and 4 year olds as they sat upright on a vehicle's bench seat, using a child's fleece blanket. Bella's post mortem injuries to her mouth - torn frenulum and repeated bites to her tongue - are consistent with heavy downward pressure from a strong, bare hand, while she lay horizontal on a bed, not an upright, seated attack with a soft blanket.
Looking forward to the second part of this video with high hopes!
5
-
4
-
Because psychopaths like CW are parasites who exploit other people for their own selfish ends, then when they are done with them, dump them like trash - in Chris Watts' case, literally dump them like trash. Chris Watts was drawn to a strong woman like Shanann because he is weak and introverted - the guy can barely wipe his own ass! Her financial independence will have appealed to him too (always a hard worker, Shanann owned her own $400k home when she met him). He is a weak man, no drive or personality - that's why he hitched his wagon to the charismatic, capable Shanann, she made him look good and raised his status in society. Marriage to her suited him very well, until his eldest child was 4 and he got bored and wanted out. The killings were always likely/inevitable at some point but the timing was triggered by three things - his affair, his financial worries and most urgently, the new pregnancy. As a psychopath he never loved his wife or kids, only pretended to, to get what he wanted. When he no longer wanted them, they were totally expendable in his mind. He is the worst kind of psycho - a narcissistic one. He did not want the financial burden of the family, so divorce wasn't enough for him, murder was the perfect, logical solution to his problem, in his cold, psychopathic mind. Chilling to think that this time last year, Shanann thought she was a happily married woman with a bright future.
4
-
@gabriel39495 In fact there were not one but two two independent 911 witness reports of Brian slapping and hitting Gabby, and cops were aware of both. That's strong corroborating evidence of HIS abuse.
The ignorant assumptions about domestic abuse you're describing. are sadly all-too common among the general public. It's high time people were better educated, to recognise the red flags of abusers like Brian and escape them..
But police are professionals, dealing with these toxic relationships every day. It's frankly shocking that the bodycam footage revealed such huge inadequacies in their domestic abuse training. They should know better and do better, than to simply accept what the victim and abuser tell them at face value!
It was very predictable Gabby would cover for Brian. Victims frequently collude with and protect their abuser, not wanting to get him in trouble/arrested, officers should have expected that and viewed it with healthy scepticism. And Brian was bound to look after number one, like the extreme covert narcissist he is. That's the standard victim/abuser dynamic. Yet clearly cops didn't know that, weren't familiar with the standard behaviours, and totally believed both Gabby and Brian's acts!
No wonder Brian was grinning broadly at the end of the video. He had totally fooled those police officers with his meek, cooperative 'good guy' act, and manipulated their perceptions to such a degree thatthey actually thought his victim was the perpetrator. That was a disastrous and very basic mistake by law enforcement! This footage needs to be used in future to better train all police on domestic abuse cases - including the men in the video.
Police only made a bad situation worse. Had they handled this encounter very differently, correctly identified the victim and the perpetrator and treated them accordingly, Gabby might well be alive today. If I were her parents, I would be utterly enraged at those police officers.
4
-
Agreed, I think the recent libel case will help men and women recognise sinister narcissistic traits in potential partners, and escape the relationship before they get seriously hurt - or even killed.
I am glad for Johnny Depp that he stuck to his guns and sued evil Amber Heard - she was telling such horrific lies about him 5 years after their divorce, he could no longer stay silent. It was clear she intended to continue milking their historic, failed 15-month marriage indefinitely, by destroying his good name for her own self-promotion.
He could not continue to tolerate that. And in confronting her lies in this very public court case, I'm convinced he's made a valuable contribution to our understanding of domestic abuse, whatever the sex of victim and perpetrator.
It's mostly women who are victims of domestic abuse and they are almost exclusively the victims of domestic homicide. However the Depp vs Heard case has publicised the fact women can be heinous domestic abusers too. And men should follow Johnny Depp's example and not be ashamed to tell the truth about the abuse they suffered from a woman.
The rules are the same, regardless of sex. Abusers never change, and abuse only ever gets worse - if they hit you once, don't stick around to find out if they are true to their promise not to hit you again. They won't be. You have been given a sample of things to come, and if you remain with that person you may not live to tell the tale. I believe Amber Heard was capable of killing Johnny Depp, and the only reason he's alive today is that he left the US for a European tour right after telling her the relationship was over. If he had not, he may well have wound up with the large knife she gifted him (inscribed 'TILL DEATH') sticking out of his heart.
Narcissistic abusers won't accept rejection, and their violence can escalate to murder when the victim takes away their power and ends the relationship. When you hear about yet another woman murdered by a man she was in an intimate relationship with, chances are he killed her soon after she dumped him.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
100% agree! In courageously coming out as a male victim of female domestic abuse, Johnny Depp has performed a great public service in educating other victims (and potential future victims), about the M.O. of vile narcissistic abusers like Amber Heard. God bless him, he deserves an award for that IMO.
Sadly there are many more abusers out there just like her, and the cycle of narcissistic abuse is all too predictable. That's why it's crucial people are educated to recognise the red flags in an abuser's behaviour, that indicate they need to escape that relationship sooner rather than later!
You can waste many precious years being made miserable by one of these toxic, vindictive parasites - trust me, I've done the homework! After the early, romantic 'love-bombing' phase in which they are devoted and attentive, can't do enough for you, and get you hooked, the abusive 'de-valuing' stage begins, when they turn on you and start to criticise the qualities in you they used to praise.
Amber Heard knew exactly how to hurt Depp, challenging his credentials as a top movie star with insults like "Old, fat, washed-up actor" - the guy who, unlike her, commanded $20 million a movie!
Johnny Depp adores his children, so of course she knew that was another soft spot. She criticised his parenting and dismissed him as a 'Deadbeat dad'. The CONCEIT of a childless woman who didn't even get along with Depp's children (and aggressively fought with him in front of them) attacking his parenting skills, is off the frigging scale!
Amber Heard is a vile, manipulative and supremely self-serving excuse for a human being, a violent thug posing as a humanitarian, a champion of women, and most outrageously of all, as an abuse victim. What a sick joke - talk about a wolf in sheep's clothing! The Depp vs Heard trial fully exposed who Amber Heard really is - and she fully deserved to be 'outed' as an abuser and pathological liar. Today she's finished as an actor and a public figure. Her sins have come back to bite her, and all because six years after they split, she could not quit abusing her more famous and popular ex husband with heinous lies designed to destroy him!
I'm grateful to Johnny Depp for his moral courage in confronting her through the courts, and showing the world how easy it is for a decent, intelligent person to be taken in by a narcissistic abuser like her. As a victim of childhood domestic abuse at the hands of his sadistic mother, Depp was pretty much the perfect, tailor-made victim for Amber Heard. And she brought him low enough to self harm, as we heard in the heartbreaking audio recording of him after they'd split, telling her to cut him with his own knife. "She had taken everything from me, so I offered her my blood", he told the shocked court. The physical deterioration in Johnny Depp from the start to the bitter end of his relationship with Heard, should serve as a stark warning to us all of how destructive such abusers can be if you let them into your life and give them power over you. The 6-week trial must have been quite an ordeal for him.
Knowledge is power, and I believe his historic legal victory will literally save the lives of people who would otherwise have been ensnared by another male or female 'Amber Heard'. She is far from the only one - sadly, there are many more abusers out there, just like her. Be careful friends - protect your heart and soul!
4
-
3
-
Do you find Amber Heard attractive then? I really don't see it, even when she was younger and not as haggered as now - physically and charisma-wise, she's nothing special in my view. I admire good looking, magnetic people of both sexes and readily praise where it's due. But I cannot see what Depp saw in her - she's no Grace Kelly, Ava Gardner, Marilyn Monroe or even Scarlett Johansson! Frankly it's no surprise to me she's a lesbian - it's pretty obvious. There are umpteen way better looking, more intriguing and far sexier women than her around, and he could take his pick.
The answer to why he was so drawn to toxic Amber Heard, lies not in her decidedly average physical appeal, but in her narcissistic abuser credentials. Because sadly he was drawn to her toxicity, as a survivor of childhood narcissistic abuse by his mother. The roots of such toxic relationships go deep!
3
-
@Sassfire Spot on! I think that's an excellent point - the van life project only succeeded in exposing Brian to Gabby for the abusive loser he is. And at last (very belatedly), she realised she could not plan a long-term future with him.
Prior to her murder, Gabby had been living with Brian at his parents' house for around 2 years I think. This of course gave him even more status and power over her - it's crystal clear how his parents prioritise and perhaps idolise him, and how he became such a toxic narcissist.
I suspect living with Brian's parents kept Gabby in that bad relationship, and allowed him to extend his control and influence over her in that privileged living situation, longer than would be the case had she lived independently of him.
It's well known how abusers quickly set about isolating the victim from her support network of family and friends. Gabby moved many miles away from hers, to live with him in his parents' home. She was very vulnerable to his gas-lighting here. When the full details of this appalling crime are revealed I believe we'll hear her family and friends had deep reservations about her relationship, and had seen worrying changes in her behaviour.
I think Brian was rapidly eroding her natural spark, effervescence and confidence. She was quick to blame herself on the bodycam, for her behaviour - failing to see it was Brian who was making her so unhappy. That is classic abuse, the victim gets so brainwashed and confused by the perpetrator, they blame themselves for his nasty conduct!
3
-
3
-
BINGO! Great post. Covert narcs like Brian Laundrie are chameleon-like. They learn young that they are not like other people, with their healthy emotions and thought processes. So they learn how to fake the ability to love and care about others. And by faking it, they can successfully attract genuine, big-hearted people like Gabby and have close relationships with them. But because they care only for themselves, any such close relationship is a sham, and built on a lie.
You can see on the police bodycam Brian is a two-faced fraud, who treats people only in terms of what they can do for him. He would never do anyone a good turn unless there was something in it for him. The way he smarms up to the cops by playing the hapless 'nice guy', is utterly sickening. I can't believe they fell for it!
Those cops didn't even confront him about the independent witness who rang 911 to report he had assaulted Gabby that morning - the reason they were pulling the van over! No wonder he was laughing at the end of the bodycam footage, as he was driven off to spend the night in a comfortable hotel. He totally fooled them! Meanwhile poor Gabby was having to drive herself away (after saying she wasn't confident at the wheel), to spend the night alone in the van. Brian must have felt fully confident Gabby would be even more vulnerable to reconciling with him next morning, totally on his terms. Police only made a bad situation worse!
I read that the lead cop in the bodycam video is now off work while the footage is reviewed and a decision is taken by his bosses on his conduct. No doubt he'll face no consequences - cops look after their own. Meanwhile Gabby lays dead on a cold mortuary slab, aged 22. Police missed a golden opportunity to save her. If those officers received any training at all on domestic abuse, it was woefully inadequate!
3
-
@CrystallynRose I think you nailed it - there was clearly an innate reluctance on the part of the male officers to condemn Brian. The more I've watched this bodycam, the more obvious their wish to protect him from the consequences of his independently confirmed domestic violence becomes.
To any decent person their approach is baffling - it certainly warrants further analysis. Brian was in a very strong position here - neither his victim Gabby nor the cops wanted to blow the whistle on him for his abuse! His relief at the end of the video is obvious - he totally got away with it.
He must have checked into the hotel that night (on Gabby's credit card), feeling so massively entitled he was pretty much untouchable. Police refusal to confront him over his 911 witnessed domestic abuse only gave him a green light to escalate it. Two weeks later that escalation in violence reached its final, horrible conclusion - he killed her.
I agree, the high rates of domestic abuse among policemen are extremely concerning. You made some very insightful points. I guess cops are also men, and as the statistics so powerfully show, sadly a cross section of men from all walks of life, cultures and classes abuse their female partner behind closed doors. There's no typical domestic abuser - the one big factor they share in common is that they are male.
I think the predominantly masculine nature/demographic of law enforcement has to be significant. When men get together (or chat online), they can fast wander into 'locker room' territory from which females and their values are disrespected. Here in the UK, the recent shocking rape and murder of Sarah Everard as she walked home by a serving policeman, has uncovered ugly misogyny within the Metropolitan Police Force. The killer Wayne Couzens was exchanging misogynist chat and pictures with five police colleagues on 'Whatsapp'. When men get together the 'macho' comes out - and this can mean the disrespect, humiliation, persecution - and worse - of women. Even more shocking, is that it's come to light Couzens was reported to police at least twice for exposing his genitals to women, most recently a few days before the murder. Yet no action was taken against him - he wasn't even spoken to. Why not? Was this really an oversight as they claim - or do men protect other men, even those guilty of crimes against women? The Brian Laundrie bodycam, and the case of killer policeman Wayne Couzens, would support that view.
There's every reason to believe there is institutionalised misogyny within the British police force. There is now a huge crisis of confidence in the police by women, 50% of the public. The murder of Sarah Everard has left most females feeling they cannot trust the police. If ever a case warranted a full and transparent public inquiry, it's this one, just as 20 years ago there was such an inquiry into racism in the force following Stephen Lawrence's murder by a white gang. Yet no such inquiry has been launched by a government whose priority is not females, but keeping the police on side. In 2021 racism is rightly classed a hate crime, but misogyny which kills many more people each year is not. Women and girls are always society's lowest possible priority.
Abusive men have a public persona (the 'nice guy' we see Brian playing in this bodycam footage), and a private face their intimate partner knows is starkly different - and fears! Gabby's terror of Brian being sent to jail for even one night, reveals her fear of consequences from him. He isn't the passive, smiling, unassuming guy he's showing to police. In reality he's a violent, vicious, hair-trigger tempered, manipulative bully - and police should never have taken him at face value!
The bodycam in this case is invaluable as an educational tool both for the public and for law enforcement around the world. It's a textbook lesson to police in how NOT to handle an abuser and his victim. I sincerely hope lessons will be learned by the police, and far better education and training given to them as a direct result of Gabby Petito's homicide. But clearly the assumptions, prejudices and misogyny that made cops mishandle this so badly, are widespread and deep-rooted within society as a whole.
Femicide is a worldwide pandemic killing more women and girls than Covid. It must be prioritised globally, if the horrifying statistics are ever to improve. Clearly the way children are raised, is a critical part of the puzzle. The anti-social, over-protective conduct of Brian Laundrie's mom and dad provides some clue as to how he became so dangerously entitled and abusive that he killed his girlfriend. Parents must raise their sons to be loving and respectful boyfriends, fiances and husbands, and to treat all females with consideration.There is much to be gained across the board, from improving the lot of females. Studies have shown, when women are respected and their situation improves, there are positive knock on effects for all of society.
Alas improvements in human rights are always slow progress, and in the meantime fabulous, much-loved women like Gabby Petito are being lost to the world, suffering cruel, and totally unnecessary deaths.
3
-
@arlettearlette9282 Agreed, I thought Amber Heard's make up at trial was quite extreme with all that light, shimmering highlighter on her cheekbones. Heavy make up like that is ageing too!
Heard has also clearly had surgical intervention at some point, with cheek implants (a cosmetic surgeon did an excellent YT video expose with 'Before' and 'After' pictures which told the story clearly).
The cheek implants were a terrible mistake. They didn't give her the beautiful, natural-looking high cheekbones of Johnny Depp (whose fine features are down to his native American blood), but instead look artificial and cast strange shadows under her eyes. That's the danger when you begin irreversible surgical adjustments to your face - it's like pulling a loose thread on a sweater, you may find that the whole damn thing comes apart!
Amber Heard is no longer the fresh-faced, pretty blonde who turned a superstar's head. She is 35 but in my view looks 10 years older and is pretty ravaged from her booze and drug habits (the hypocrisy of her crucifying Depp, when she has her own addictions!) Plus the toxic violence of her narcissistic abusive personality is emerging on her face, as a nasty character like hers always becomes visible in time.
The future looks bleak for A Turd - and she brought it all on herself. She has trashed her public image, become box office poison and effectively ended her future as a model or any kind of public 'influencer'. Many narcissistic abusers get away with their crimes, it's good to see one who finally got her comeuppance. In trying to destroy Johnny Depp with vile, malicious lies, Heard ultimately pushed the self-destruct button.
It's such sweet irony that she lost every dollar of the staggering $7 million payout she got from Depp for a 15 month, childless marriage - and has to pay him a couple more million, on top of handing that divorce settlement right back to him! All because years after they split she could not stop publicly slagging him off, to promote herself off his more famous and popular name. So as a result of her spiteful vendetta against the ex husband she'd treated like a punchbag, she wound up making no money from her divorce (cash was clearly her priority in bouncing Depp into a fast beach wedding with no pre nup agreement in place).
The British judge in Depp's failed libel trial of 2020 was fooled by her lies that she's no gold digger (perjury, anyone?), but the longer and far more thorough US trial of 6 weeks duration finally and fully nailed that lie. Amber Heard is a BLATANT gold digger of the lowest kind, who greedily pushed for millions from Depp in their divorce, pocketed all that cash, then heinously and repeatedly LIED to the media that she'd gifted it all to charity. And wasn't it fun watching her squirm on the witness stand when forced to admit her duplicity, with her dumb, "I use the terms 'Pledge' and 'Donate' interchangeably", BS! (Camille Vasquez' withering response: "I don't, Miss Heard!")
Johnny Depp has fully exposed the real Amber Heard on the world stage - a toxic, violent narcissistic abuser and pathological liar - in simple terms, a violent thug and a serial domestic abuser. Good for Johnny, his triumph is a triumph for ALL domestic abuse victims of both sexes, and was a disaster for bad lawyers and bad liars!
3
-
@amberparker9883 Very insightful analysis of Amber Heard's sister Whitney's evidence. I thought it was truly pitiful to see her supporting her abusive older sister through perjury like that, particularly when it was obvious she did not hate her former brother-in-law Johnny Depp at all, and had no reason to.
He had always been good to her, just as he was good to his wife and everyone Amber wanted close to her (even moving them into neighbouring penthouse apartments, rent-free - the polar opposite conduct of an abuser, who seeks to isolate their victim from their support network. Johnny literally surrounded his wife with hers!)
Had Johnny Depp been the violent monster Amber and her (coached) sister claimed, her attitude towards him in her evidence would have been very different. It was clear she was not talking about a man who had tried to push her down a flight of stairs, or indeed ever been violent or abusive to her. On the contrary, Depp welcomed Whitney into his privileged world with open arms, and treated her like she was his sister too.
It is a measure of how much abusive control Amber maintains over Whitney, that she was willing to betray and defame a decent man like that under oath - particularly in view of his many kindnesses to her over the years. Shameful behaviour, and like Amber, Whitney has brought a shit-ton of bad karma onto her own head!
3
-
@juliettelex7597 The male 911 caller, an independent witness with no reason to lie, reported what he saw - a man 'slapping and hitting' a woman.
It's hardly surprising Brian Laundrie had facial scratches. Those kinds of minor injuries are commonly sustained by domestic abusers, during assaults on women. It's the obvious though sadly ineffective way females defend themselves from violent men. Those marks are also nearly always found and photographed on domestic killers, after they have murdered their female victim.
Instead of focusing on Brian and his minor scratches, police should have checked the victim Gabby for injuries and asked her if Brian had hurt her. Not only was she identified by the 911 caller as the victim and Brian the aggressor, as the woman it was she, not he, who was at risk of serious harm. Her murder by Brian less than 2 weeks later, tragically confirms this.
Domestic abusers are overwhelmingly male, and their victims overwhelmingly female. Police above anyone, should know that, and treat couples like Gabby and Brian accordingly. All they succeeded in doing was further isolating Gabby by sending her off to spend the night alone in her van, and endorsing Brian's abuse by telling him he wasn't in any trouble and being crazily pally with him. This '60 Minutes' report from Australia features excellent analysis of the bodycam footage from a criminal profiler. That professional's verdict is clear - police totally fucked it up! https://youtu.be/A4DeSl8QGD4
3
-
Wow how prophetic was this video - BRAVO DEREK, great insight into the Smiths' toxic marriage. Less than 2 years later this rapidly deteriorating, abusive union imploded at the Academy Awards, on the night Will picked up his long awaited Oscar.
He has now ruined his movie career, forced to resign from the Academy and any future Oscar nominations by behaving like his wife's attack-dog at the film industry's biggest night of the year.
Will had clearly been a ticking time bomb of emasculated rage at his wife's narcissistic abuse and adultery. And he directed that anger in the most self sabotaging and inappropriate way possible - assaulting Chris Rock over a mild wisecrack about Jada's hair. DAMN how much of an out of control ego does that woman have? She has alopecia not cancer, and it was a GI Jane joke , not a crack about Kojak!
Even if Chris Rock had joked about her affair with their son's best friend (joking about 'sleepovers'), it would not have justified that physical assault. Will's an idiot - HIS bad choices got him into this mess, and he must take the consequences. Ironically, one consequence could be Jada leaving him, after all he will no longer be the A-lister she married now he publicly disgraced himself like that. And Jada clearly isn't in this marriage for love!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@looking4things669 Amen. You're absolutely right, Sheriff Grady Judd is a fine example to all cops. One thing is certain, the Brian Laundrie calamity would never have happened on his watch!
Law enforcement must learn lessons from this monumental F-up. Thank God the bodycam video exists to expose it, or there would be an even bigger cover up than it appears is happening now, with the re-writing of one witness statement. Seems the shit's hitting the fan big time for the cops in that bodycam footage, as it absolutely should!
Unfortunately there is an historic culture of men protecting other men, when they make mistakes. That warped culture thrives in macho organisations like the police, and goes some way to explain those officers' inappropriate support for domestic abuse suspect Brian Laundrie.
Decent, strong men with nothing to prove (and no skeletons in their own closet), call out substandard males like Brian Laundrie. We've seen that in the no nonsense condemnation of both Laundrie and the police, from Sheriff Judd and from commentators like Vinnie Politan and Derek Van Shaik.
Predictably, we've also seen the opposite - excuses for men like the idiot who keeps spouting bullshit in this thread. Misogynists, Incels and inadequate males generally, will try any ruse however ridiculous, to defend killer Brian Laundrie and the cops who let him off the hook. There's no point in responding to those losers - they don't believe their own illogical, misogynist garbage, any more than anyone else does! They're ridiculous.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
@Karamarika Glad you've heard that saying before, though your interpretation of it was so literal and dismissive, you apparently didn't understand it!
I've heard your tired arguments for the death penalty a million times before, and they still don't hold up. But I would rather hear them, than spurious analogies about totally unrelated subjects like abortion. Abortion is always an unhelpful diversion here, because you cannot compare the life of an as yet incomplete, still forming human being in the womb, with the life of a fully formed, independently functioning adult human being. Ditto the other examples you gave of 'killing' - eg euthanasia, again a totally different context, as is self defence, so not at all useful in this context.
You are muddying the issue we're discussing which is specifically crime and punishment and the morality of the state ending the lives of the most violent/dangerous criminals. It's a complex enough debate, without bringing in umpteen unrelated issues!
I'm not religious. But I see a fundamental problem with one human being playing God and killing another because they have broken a society's laws. That is open to both wilful abuse and to dumb human error. And it will inevitably result in innocent lives being taken, from time to time - which rather defeats the object. Perhaps you think a few innocent lives ended is a price worth paying to empty prisons?
No point in prolonging this since we won't agree, but there's a really important principal at stake which you've overlooked. If you live in a society which can legally kill you if you break its rules, whatever its rules happen to be, you no longer live in a democracy. That is always a primitive and oppressive system and not one I want to live at the mercy of.
The present legal and penal system is far from perfect and needs radical reform. In my view the primary purpose of justice is protection of the public and to that end life sentences should be just that. I notice you didn't suggest the death penalty is any kind of deterrent which is quite right, it isn't. Countries which have the harshest sentences eg the death penalty and various violent sanctions such as public floggings have just as much if not more serious crime as those that do not. In terms of sentences there is nothing new under the sun that hasn't been tried somewhere before, and none of it has any effect on criminal behaviour or crime rates.
What's really needed is a comprehensive assessment of the bigger picture, the worldwide crisis of male violence (the vast majority of perpetrators of violent crime have always been and remain, males). Yet time and time again we either ignore that fact or we collectively accept that a percentage of the male population is dangerous, as though it's inevitable. What a terrible slur on ALL men that is!
I believe we are too often focussing on the wrong end of the problem, punishment, when we should be giving equal focus to prevention of crime through multiple different approaches. I don't pretend there are easy answers, but I do think more lateral thinking is needed. This means greater research into how and why so many men become a danger to society, and a much greater regard for educating potential victims of crime so they can better protect themselves, eg from domestic violence situations. It simply should not be possible for a high risk prisoner like Ted Bundy to escape a high security jail, that was an outrage which meant he killed again.
But incarcerated killers like Bundy are in my view a woefully under used resource. These most extreme criminals should be studied like lab rats while the tax payer is funding their bed and board. If experts can learn more about how such criminals are formed, their M.O. and behaviours, priceless data and better understanding can be gained from them. This could have positive future implications for both potential perpetrators and potential victims.
I had to smile when you talked about the death penalty being a 'punishment'. How is someone punished if they are humanely euthanised? That's no punishment at all, if anything it's merciful! Many killers request death for that very reason - it is infinitely preferable to life locked in a cage!
2
-
2
-
2